Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[agentsteel53]

EDIT: And here's a fantasy sign based on if much more of the Los Angeles freeway system was built as planned:

just a few very small quibbles.

Cal 258 didn't exist at the same time as outline-shield US routes (I think the Whitnall would've been CA-64 if signed in the early 60s), and I think Cal Div Hwys signed state routes as "Cal. XXX" or "State XXX" instead of "Hwy XXX".  I just saw a sign that said "JUNCTION/CAL. 190" from 1958 that came off US-99, and a 1958 signing manual I've seen had "State XXX".

Also, you're using a 1961-spec shield shape for US-66, but that shield style only appeared in white-background form, starting in 1962 in California.  The 1958-spec outline shield you are looking for is this one:



I also do not know if CA did mixed-case and all-caps on the same sign.  As far as I know, they had all-caps on side-mounted signs and mixed-case on overheads until 1958, when they switched over to mixed-case in both contexts.  

oh, and make the sign black

[TheStranger]

just a few very small quibbles.

Cal 258 didn't exist at the same time as outline-shield US routes (I think the Whitnall would've been CA-64 if signed in the early 60s)

IIRC, both 64 and 258 are post-1964 numbers, with the middle section of the route (from today's Route 2/101 junction paralleling 5 and 101/170 to the 170/5 junction) being canceled around that time period...I don't recall a route number (besides the LRN) being assigned for it at any point in the 1950s.

(For that matter, Route 170 did not exist as a numbered designation until 1964, either, with much of that route being LRN 159.  I remember reading some unsubstantiated rumor that 170 was going to be part of a US 6 reroute but I can't say that for sure - it would've made sense though as it would bypass the Pasadena Freeway.)

, and I think Cal Div Hwys signed state routes as "Cal. XXX" or "State XXX" instead of "Hwy XXX".  I just saw a sign that said "JUNCTION/CAL. 190" from 1958 that came off US-99, and a 1958 signing manual I've seen had "State XXX".

oh, and make the sign black

Thanks!  I do wonder when green first started being predominant - the Interstate era?

[agentsteel53]

IIRC, both 64 and 258 are post-1964 numbers

I do know that LRN 64 was out in the desert, along the US-60/70 corridor:



yep, that is a signed LRN!  (And an Arizona milepost, so don't get too excited  )

I wonder if that deviated enough from US-60/70 to cover the Whitnall Freeway much further inland.  Also I wonder what signed route number they'd have assigned it - likely not 257, as they consciously didn't exceed route number 198* until 1964.

(*okay, two exceptions - 1934 routes 440 and 740, but those were branches of 44 and 74, respectively)

(For that matter, Route 170 did not exist as a numbered designation until 1964, either, with much of that route being LRN 159.  I remember reading some unsubstantiated rumor that 170 was going to be part of a US 6 reroute but I can't say that for sure - it would've made sense though as it would bypass the Pasadena Freeway.)

I certainly did not know that!  It does explain the 170 patches on 1959-1961 guide signs on I-5 southbound.  I'd thought they covered up white-spade 170 markers, but they must cover up something else - likely it is empty under the 1964-spec outline shield 170 shield, but if it's not empty, it would be great to know what number is under there!

Thanks!  I do wonder when green first started being predominant - the Interstate era?

September, 1959, is the earliest green spec sheet I have.  Thanks to the indomitable JN Winkler, who sent me 350 pages (!) of 1950s and 1960s California layout sheets!  

(it seems in general California took about a year or two to adopt federal standards that it chose to adopt ... they switched to AASHO 1957-spec green signs in Sept '59, and they switched to AASHO 1961-spec white route shields, as opposed to outline shields, in August '62.)

there are black spec sheets as late as 1962, and I have seen two black signs for "El Camino Real", both of which are 1961.  I do not know what contexts got black, and what got green, as all freeway signs, and some non-freeway signs were green as early as 1959.

[TheStranger]

IIRC, both 64 and 258 are post-1964 numbers

I do know that LRN 64 was out in the desert, along the US-60/70 corridor:

yep, that is a signed LRN!  (And an Arizona milepost, so don't get too excited   )

Wow!  Is this the only known example?  My guess for the likeliest place for another LRN being noted in the field would be LRN 2, otherwise known as US 101.

I wonder if that deviated enough from US-60/70 to cover the Whitnall Freeway much further inland.  Also I wonder what signed route number they'd have assigned it - likely not 257, as they consciously didn't exceed route number 198* until 1964.

(*okay, two exceptions - 1934 routes 440 and 740, but those were branches of 44 and 74, respectively)

Looking at Dan Faigin's cahighways.org, LRN 265 applied to the post-1964 Route 64 segment of the Whitnall Freeway, while the Route 258/Western Avenue freeway was not officially proposed at the state level until 1965.
http://cahighways.org/265-272.html#LR265
http://cahighways.org/257-264.html#258

It however was on ACSC planning maps as early as 1947, as the "Normandie Freeway" along Normandie Avenue -
http://cahighways.org/maps/1947-la-acsc.jpg

LRN 64 was a very odd mix of signed routes: Route 74/one-time 740, part of Route 195 (including the pre-1970s east-west segment), and then US 60/70 (now I-10).
http://cahighways.org/057-064.html#064

(For that matter, Route 170 did not exist as a numbered designation until 1964, either, with much of that route being LRN 159.  I remember reading some unsubstantiated rumor that 170 was going to be part of a US 6 reroute but I can't say that for sure - it would've made sense though as it would bypass the Pasadena Freeway.)

I certainly did not know that!  It does explain the 170 patches on 1959-1961 guide signs on I-5 southbound.  I'd thought they covered up white-spade 170 markers, but they must cover up something else - likely it is empty under the 1964-spec outline shield 170 shield, but if it's not empty, it would be great to know what number is under there!

If 170 didn't exist as a route number until 1964 - and considering it is an even-numbered north-south route (which did not exist for the most part in the 1934-1964 system) - white shields couldn't have been present, though I don't think a US highway shield's "peaks" would be hidden by a state shield, and don't remember seeing that at all.  I HAVE also heard (but can't confirm) that the Pomona Freeway had, at one time, US 60 shields greened out before the route opened and covered up with (State) Route 60 signage, much like at the eastern end of the Moreno Valley Freeway.

[agentsteel53]

Wow!  Is this the only known example?  My guess for the likeliest place for another LRN being noted in the field would be LRN 2, otherwise known as US 101.

only example I've ever seen.

I don't think a US highway shield's "peaks" would be hidden by a state shield, and don't remember seeing that at all.

it seemed to me like the patches are big enough to hide an older US shield.  these are small shields; as they appear on advance-mileage signs for the next three exits.  the signs with larger shields at the intersection itself do not have patches.

they're this style of shield



(incidentally, that sign is still around!  it now says "110", though, for both freeways)

I HAVE also heard (but can't confirm) that the Pomona Freeway had, at one time, US 60 shields greened out before the route opened and covered up with (State) Route 60 signage, much like at the eastern end of the Moreno Valley Freeway.

I have no idea.  I'm a bit confused about the history of route 60 through the area; for example, I-10 (San Bernardino Fwy) was once signed as US-60.  Here is a 1955-57 sign (note the logos on both black signs) in a 1958 photo.  



and here is a 1963 photo, with a sign whose spec I do not know.  Definitely after 1959, and possibly as early as 1960, but maybe as late as 1963.  (Ramona Fwy was renamed to San Bernardino Fwy in 1959, I think.)



there is a 60 patch at the east LA interchange on 5 southbound - the entire third row on the advance-exit sign is patched, not just the shield, implying to me that possibly the freeway was renamed as well as renumbered.

so I do not know when US-60 was moved from the Ramona/San Berdoo Fwy to the Pomona Fwy (and, at the same time, to the Moreno Valley Fwy?)

[agentsteel53]

in fact, I believe the sign that is patched (to have a CA-60 shield on the last line) is the one in the distance in that last photo!

I cannot make out the third line, but the second line is Santa Monica Fwy, with no number.  The first line is Soto St, and the third ... any idea??

[TheStranger]

I don't think a US highway shield's "peaks" would be hidden by a state shield, and don't remember seeing that at all.

it seemed to me like the patches are big enough to hide an older US shield.  these are small shields; as they appear on advance-mileage signs for the next three exits.  the signs with larger shields at the intersection itself do not have patches.

they're this style of shield

(incidentally, that sign is still around!  it now says "110", though, for both freeways)

I do remember seeing that - and a few other vintage signs - near the Four-Level in February.  (The signage in that area is fascinating, not only due to the US route history of the junction, which included Route 66, but also due to the lack of clarity whether all of the Harbor Freeway is part of Interstate 110 or not, which seems to have been improved somewhat in the last two years.)

I HAVE also heard (but can't confirm) that the Pomona Freeway had, at one time, US 60 shields greened out before the route opened and covered up with (State) Route 60 signage, much like at the eastern end of the Moreno Valley Freeway.

I have no idea.  I'm a bit confused about the history of route 60 through the area; for example, I-10 (San Bernardino Fwy) was once signed as US-60.  Here is a 1955-57 sign (note the logos on both black signs) in a 1958 photo.  

and here is a 1963 photo, with a sign whose spec I do not know.  Definitely after 1959, and possibly as early as 1960, but maybe as late as 1963.  (Ramona Fwy was renamed to San Bernardino Fwy in 1959, I think.)



there is a 60 patch at the east LA interchange on 5 southbound - the entire third row on the advance-exit sign is patched, not just the shield, implying to me that possibly the freeway was renamed as well as renumbered.

so I do not know when US-60 was moved from the Ramona/San Berdoo Fwy to the Pomona Fwy (and, at the same time, to the Moreno Valley Fwy?)

Based on historical maps, here's the chronology, which involves many reroutings:

1933: http://members.cox.net/mkpl2/hist/droz-laca33n.jpg
US 99 follows US 66 east of Pasadena to San Bernardino; it is unclear if 99's routing followed then-future Route 118, today's I-210, in the Sunland area, or if 99 continued to downtown Los Angeles.

US 60 followed today's Valley Boulevard from east of Los Angeles through Puente and Walnut to Pomona, on a corridor that partially parallels I-10 and partially actually is much closer to the Pomona Freeway alignment, past El Monte.  (However, the Garvey Avenue corridor - which more closely follows today's I-10 - was under construction at the time to provide a more direct route towards Pomona.)

1936: http://www.cosmos-monitor.com/ca/map1936/detail/san-bernardino.html
http://www.cosmos-monitor.com/ca/map1936/detail/la-detail.html
US 70 is introduced...but not quite on the routing that it would take for most of its life in the Inland Empire.  It did follow US 60 and US 99 along the Garvey Avenue pathway eastward, but then followed US 60 through Pomona and Riverside (including the concurrency with then-US 395 between Riverside and Moreno Valley) eastward to Beaumont.  US 99 ran alone east of Pomona along today's I-10 corridor, before rejoining 60 and 70 in Beaumont.

1941: http://members.cox.net/mkpl5/hist2/LA-1941.jpg

No real changes to the LA-area routing here, along Garvey.

1955: http://members.cox.net/mkpl2/hist/map-ca1955-ssw.jpg
Not clear when the shift of 70 from the 60 path through Riverside, to the 99/today's 10 path through San Bernardino occurred, though it was some time between 1936 and 1955.

1959: http://www.cahighways.org/maps/1959rmn.jpg
San Bernardino Freeway name in place for US 60/70/99 from Los Angeles to Pomona, with 60 continuing to begin its southerly trek towards Riverside in Pomona (as opposed to beginning it today in Los Angeles) and 70/99 having a business route along Holt Avenue.

1963: http://www.cahighways.org/maps/1963routes.jpg
Although 60/70/99 still run concurrent (along with I-10, which is not noted on this map), the Pomona Freeway paralleling Valley Boulevard is shown as under construction.

in fact, I believe the sign that is patched (to have a CA-60 shield on the last line) is the one in the distance in that last photo!

I cannot make out the third line, but the second line is Santa Monica Fwy, with no number.  The first line is Soto St, and the third ... any idea??

 Here's what it looks like today - note that the first line is for Fourth Street, and the third line has greenout for "Pomona Fwy/Route 60":
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Monterey+Park&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=46.677964,78.662109&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Monterey+Park,+Los+Angeles,+California&ll=34.057877,-118.214393&spn=0,0.009602&z=17&layer=c&cbll=34.057748,-118.214381&panoid=JiTOA9Ma6Ey6wD2sjAGEYg&cbp=12,185.3,,0,7.61

I can't tell in the older photo if that third line had an outline US 60 shield, though I would be far from surprised if that was it.

[agentsteel53]

I do remember seeing that - and a few other vintage signs - near the Four-Level in February.  (The signage in that area is fascinating, not only due to the US route history of the junction, which included Route 66, but also due to the lack of clarity whether all of the Harbor Freeway is part of Interstate 110 or not, which seems to have been improved somewhat in the last two years.)

I thought it switched designation just a bit south of the four-level, with a few erroneous I-110 shields north of that switch.  I do not remember exactly where the switch is.

1963: http://www.cahighways.org/maps/1963routes.jpg
Although 60/70/99 still run concurrent (along with I-10, which is not noted on this map), the Pomona Freeway paralleling Valley Boulevard is shown as under construction.

that must be just before that freeway section opened, with US-60 getting rerouted onto it.  I think the existence of the sign showing only US 70/99 on the San Berdoo implies that 60 was on the new freeway as a US highway in 1963, before getting switched to CA-60 in 1964.

This means that the 1963 photo has an erroneous sign: the one in the background should have a 60 shield.  It's gotta be somewhere, and if it's not 70/99...

but I do not believe there is an outline 60 on that sign.  I can't verify that, but it looks to be just letters to me, referring to the older surface street.

I cannot tell if the foreground sign has a scraped-off 60.  The sign is at most 4 years old in the picture, and likely newer*, and therefore wouldn't have had time to build up a residue of dust and grime on which the missing 60 shield would be visible.  

(I say likely newer because that style of non-porcelain sign entered heavy use in 1963, with a single set of 1960 examples being the only older ones I know of - and, as far as I know, no black signs were made of that style.)

So the foreground sign is either (likely) a brand new 1963 sign with 10/70 the only shields it ever had - or it once had a scraped off 60 as well.

Here's what it looks like today - note that the first line is for Fourth Street, and the third line has greenout for "Pomona Fwy/Route 60":

oops, Fourth, not Soto.  I misremembered.  Silly me; I saw the sign three days ago.  Okay, I was doing 90mph  

I can't tell in the older photo if that third line had an outline US 60 shield, though I would be far from surprised if that was it.

I do not believe so.  It would've been a white US-60 shield, if the number was put on between August, 1962 and April, 1964 (which is likely when the freeway opened) - and Div Hwys used the latest spec (hit or miss ).  

that implies the sign was patched twice in very rapid succession.  First, to change the surface street (as seen in the '63 photo) to "Pomona Fwy [60]" (with a US shield), and then, around April, 1964, the replacement of the US shield with a state shield.  If the US-60 shield were a separate piece of white porcelain (probable), as opposed to just being printed white, then the second replacement wasn't a patch.  Instead, they unscrewed the US-60 shield and put up a CA-60.  

On Monday, I saw no evidence of there ever being a US-60 shield on the patch, but, again, I was doing 90.  Furthermore, if the patch was there only a few months, then it would've have developed a wear pattern.  But, I do believe there was one, because US-60 had to be signed somewhere.

(Unless of course they plain old forgot for a while, and put the Pomona Fwy SR-60 patch on only after April, 1964.)

So now the question remains - what is under the patch?  The '63 map doesn't identify that road by name, and the sign does not look like it says "Valley Boulevard" (or any Boulevard at all) - so I'd be interested to know what it does say.

I will have to email that photo to a friend of mine who could answer the "where's US-60" question.

[agentsteel53]

the more I look at it, there's something odd about the Santa Monica Fwy (2nd line) of the distant sign.  It looks to me like they moved the letters closer together to squeeze in the I-10 shield.

which implies that the sign is not the current one, since you can't move letters around like that on porcelain, and the current sign is unpatched. 

The current sign is very very similar, and I have no idea what year it is (have never gone through there slowly enough to check!) but it can't be the same one.  It must be a '63 or '64, given that it got patched with a SR-60 in 1964, and wasn't there in 1963.

maybe that answers the "where's US-60" question.  The sign in the foreground was just installed, and the sign in the background had yet to be replaced to reflect the new freeway. 

the question then becomes - why patch over "Pomona Fwy" on the 1963-64, and not just switch the US-60 to a CA-60?

[agentsteel53]

someone want to walk up to that sign and take a look at the date stamp? 

[TheStranger]

I do remember seeing that - and a few other vintage signs - near the Four-Level in February.  (The signage in that area is fascinating, not only due to the US route history of the junction, which included Route 66, but also due to the lack of clarity whether all of the Harbor Freeway is part of Interstate 110 or not, which seems to have been improved somewhat in the last two years.)

I thought it switched designation just a bit south of the four-level, with a few erroneous I-110 shields north of that switch.  I do not remember exactly where the switch is.

Officially, the Interstate ends at I-10, and State Route 110 begins there.  But this has to be tempered by CalTrans's precedent of inconsistency in the Bay Area - I-80 along old US 40/50 west of the Embarcadero was removed off of the Interstate system in 1968 (when the extension west of US 101 to Route 1 in Golden Gate Park was canceled), but has never been signed as "State Route 80."  (That freeway, the San Francisco Skyway, was built right before the Interstate era started, but was definitely signed I-80/US 40/US 50 from the start - I've seen one photo of that concurrency on trailblazers.)

Northbound, the Harbor Freeway north of I-10 is signed as Route 110.

Southbound past the Four-Level, not only is it almost entirely signed as I-110 (save for two signs on a collector/distributor series of ramps), the signage off of US 101 dating back to the late 80s I think has acknowledged the Harbor Freeway in its entirety (including the downtown segment) as I-110, and the 2008 signage update has also noted the I-110 south designation (rather than Route 110 south).  The I-110 signage doesn't begin until one has passed through the Four-Level (and the freeway has changed names), as demonstrated here:

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Los+Angeles&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.724817,70.3125&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Los+Angeles,+California&ll=34.064823,-118.245501&spn=0,0.004292&z=18&layer=c&cbll=34.064861,-118.245329&panoid=444nb94L7O4JfAdZQqF-EQ&cbp=12,262.27,,0,5.79 - Route 110 south in the final segment of the Pasadena Freeway, before the ramps

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Los+Angeles&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.724817,70.3125&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Los+Angeles,+California&ll=34.058215,-118.253966&spn=0.002235,0.004292&z=18&layer=c&cbll=34.058139,-118.254043&panoid=40aye81owAZ2YIJr2vF7IQ&cbp=12,246.59,,0,8.49 - I-110 south at the first exit for the Harbor Freeway after US 101

Google Maps tends to show the Harbor Freeway in its entirety as I-110.

1963: http://www.cahighways.org/maps/1963routes.jpg
Although 60/70/99 still run concurrent (along with I-10, which is not noted on this map), the Pomona Freeway paralleling Valley Boulevard is shown as under construction.

that must be just before that freeway section opened, with US-60 getting rerouted onto it.  I think the existence of the sign showing only US 70/99 on the San Berdoo implies that 60 was on the new freeway as a US highway in 1963, before getting switched to CA-60 in 1964.

This means that the 1963 photo has an erroneous sign: the one in the background should have a 60 shield.  It's gotta be somewhere, and if it's not 70/99...

but I do not believe there is an outline 60 on that sign.  I can't verify that, but it looks to be just letters to me, referring to the older surface street.

I'm not sure there was an older surface street though on that line - looking at late-1950s maps of the area, the Golden State Freeway segment that was only I-5/I-10 (and never US 99) wasn't constructed until the early 1960s, by which point the Pomona Freeway was already being built:
http://www.scvresources.com/highways/east_los_angeles_interchange.htm

I could be wrong though, just hard to tell with the background sign only slightly readable.

I cannot tell if the foreground sign has a scraped-off 60.  The sign is at most 4 years old in the picture, and likely newer*, and therefore wouldn't have had time to build up a residue of dust and grime on which the missing 60 shield would be visible.  

(I say likely newer because that style of non-porcelain sign entered heavy use in 1963, with a single set of 1960 examples being the only older ones I know of - and, as far as I know, no black signs were made of that style.)

So the foreground sign is either (likely) a brand new 1963 sign with 10/70 the only shields it ever had - or it once had a scraped off 60 as well.

There IS definitely room for a scraped-off 60 on there, but if so, there'd be some evidence of glue residue I would think (as I have seen in person for a scraped off I-80 shield at the US 50 junction with 65th Street in Sacramento).

I do not believe so.  It would've been a white US-60 shield, if the number was put on between August, 1962 and April, 1964 (which is likely when the freeway opened) - and Div Hwys used the latest spec (hit or miss ).  

that implies the sign was patched twice in very rapid succession.  First, to change the surface street (as seen in the '63 photo) to "Pomona Fwy [60]" (with a US shield), and then, around April, 1964, the replacement of the US shield with a state shield.  If the US-60 shield were a separate piece of white porcelain (probable), as opposed to just being printed white, then the second replacement wasn't a patch.  Instead, they unscrewed the US-60 shield and put up a CA-60.  

On Monday, I saw no evidence of there ever being a US-60 shield on the patch, but, again, I was doing 90.  Furthermore, if the patch was there only a few months, then it would've have developed a wear pattern.  But, I do believe there was one, because US-60 had to be signed somewhere.

(Unless of course they plain old forgot for a while, and put the Pomona Fwy SR-60 patch on only after April, 1964.)

So now the question remains - what is under the patch?  The '63 map doesn't identify that road by name, and the sign does not look like it says "Valley Boulevard" (or any Boulevard at all) - so I'd be interested to know what it does say.

I will have to email that photo to a friend of mine who could answer the "where's US-60" question.

Valley Boulevard at that area is already much more parallel to today's I-10 than to the Pomona Freeway, so that couldn't be it.  Soto Street IS the next exit after the Pomona Freeway ramp, but looking at the vintage photo, it seems like that's way too short to have been the legend...

[agentsteel53]

Officially, the Interstate ends at I-10, and State Route 110 begins there.  But this has to be tempered by CalTrans's precedent of inconsistency in the Bay Area - I-80 along old US 40/50 west of the Embarcadero was removed off of the Interstate system in 1968 (when the extension west of US 101 to Route 1 in Golden Gate Park was canceled), but has never been signed as "State Route 80."  (That freeway, the San Francisco Skyway, was built right before the Interstate era started, but was definitely signed I-80/US 40/US 50 from the start - I've seen one photo of that concurrency on trailblazers.)

I am not sure which segment of fwy you refer to.  I was just there this last weekend, and it looks to me like I-80 is signed as such from the 101.  Do you mean that this section is not actually I-80?

also, do you have the photo with 80/40/50?

(there is, incidentally, a gantry on the Bay Bridge westbound, immediately after the on-ramp from Treasure Island, that is shaped the right way, and rusty enough, to have once held an 80/40/50 shield set)

I'm not sure there was an older surface street though on that line - looking at late-1950s maps of the area, the Golden State Freeway segment that was only I-5/I-10 (and never US 99) wasn't constructed until the early 1960s, by which point the Pomona Freeway was already being built:
http://www.scvresources.com/highways/east_los_angeles_interchange.htm

from that page:

Connections to SR-60 have been built but aren't in use. They won't be until 1965. The ramps to I-10 opened in 1962.

so maybe the patch is from 1965.  As for the I-10 ramps opening in 1962: that must be the Santa Monica Fwy, and so that third sign in the 1963 picture must be a 1962 sign - though, interestingly, with the freeway un-numbered.  

if the 60 freeway opened in 1965, then the question is, why is US-60 not signed along the San Bernardino Fwy in 1963?  

There IS definitely room for a scraped-off 60 on there, but if so, there'd be some evidence of glue residue I would think (as I have seen in person for a scraped off I-80 shield at the US 50 junction with 65th Street in Sacramento).

it all depends on whether the shield was glued, or bolted on.  If it is bolts/rivets, then the resolution of the photo is insufficient to see the holes - and, since the sign is so new, there wouldn't be any dirt/grime evidence, as there is, say, at the Laval Road exit on I-5, where a riveted-on US-99 shield can be seen on a 1963 I-5 guide sign.

interestingly, despite it being 1963, the US-99 shield was an outline.  Good old Cal Div Hwys not using their own new specs.

Valley Boulevard at that area is already much more parallel to today's I-10 than to the Pomona Freeway, so that couldn't be it.  Soto Street IS the next exit after the Pomona Freeway ramp, but looking at the vintage photo, it seems like that's way too short to have been the legend...

furthermore, Soto Street is not the exact same mileage as the Santa Monica Fwy - so what was under there must correspond to what exits where CA-60 exits today.

was CA-60 opened only in 1965 as Mike Ballard's site says?  

[TheStranger]

I am not sure which segment of fwy you refer to.  I was just there this last weekend, and it looks to me like I-80 is signed as such from the 101.  Do you mean that this section is not actually I-80?

Interstate 80 (as signed) from US 101 to the Bay Bridge is officially not in the interstate system (just as Interstate 10 on the San Bernardino Freeway from I-5 to US 101 is "officially" not an interstate either, though in that case it was a one-time I-110 from 1965-1968).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_80_in_California#West_end_in_San_Francisco

I've always felt this was a clerical error (that has never been corrected) from the legislative end, as most of the removal of the "Interstate" status on signed I-80 west of the Embarcadero was part of the move to take the Western Freeway segment off of active planning, due to the freeway revolt.  (This then also suggests a followup question: was the Central Freeway, when built, constructed as I-80/US 101 as opposed to just US 101?  The Central was part of the I-80 route until the 1968 changes truncated it to its current western terminus.)

also, do you have the photo with 80/40/50?

I'll check around - it may have been in one of the official California Div Highways publications of the day.

(there is, incidentally, a gantry on the Bay Bridge westbound, immediately after the on-ramp from Treasure Island, that is shaped the right way, and rusty enough, to have once held an 80/40/50 shield set)

I'll probably be driving through there tonight so I'll be on the lookout for it...

I'm not sure there was an older surface street though on that line - looking at late-1950s maps of the area, the Golden State Freeway segment that was only I-5/I-10 (and never US 99) wasn't constructed until the early 1960s, by which point the Pomona Freeway was already being built:
http://www.scvresources.com/highways/east_los_angeles_interchange.htm

from that page:

Connections to SR-60 have been built but aren't in use. They won't be until 1965. The ramps to I-10 opened in 1962.

so maybe the patch is from 1965.  As for the I-10 ramps opening in 1962: that must be the Santa Monica Fwy, and so that third sign in the 1963 picture must be a 1962 sign - though, interestingly, with the freeway un-numbered.  

if the 60 freeway opened in 1965, then the question is, why is US-60 not signed along the San Bernardino Fwy in 1963?  

That is what I'm wondering as well - it could be as simple as CalTrans anticipating the reroute of US 60 to the Pomona routing, before the 1964 renumbering did occur, or it could even  hint at a temporary surface street routing, though I'm not sure that would be the case there.

What that photo doesn't show, however, is what the San Bernardino Freeway mainline signage itself was like.

This photo at Cameron Kaiser's site - http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/395/xtra/town2.jpg - does show another example of the I-10/US 70/US 99 concurrency (albeit with US 70/99 shields removed by the 1968 photo date), this time signed off of then-US 395 (now I-215) in southern San Bernardino.

There IS definitely room for a scraped-off 60 on there, but if so, there'd be some evidence of glue residue I would think (as I have seen in person for a scraped off I-80 shield at the US 50 junction with 65th Street in Sacramento).

it all depends on whether the shield was glued, or bolted on.  If it is bolts/rivets, then the resolution of the photo is insufficient to see the holes - and, since the sign is so new, there wouldn't be any dirt/grime evidence, as there is, say, at the Laval Road exit on I-5, where a riveted-on US-99 shield can be seen on a 1963 I-5 guide sign.

interestingly, despite it being 1963, the US-99 shield was an outline.  Good old Cal Div Hwys not using their own new specs.

Valley Boulevard at that area is already much more parallel to today's I-10 than to the Pomona Freeway, so that couldn't be it.  Soto Street IS the next exit after the Pomona Freeway ramp, but looking at the vintage photo, it seems like that's way too short to have been the legend...

furthermore, Soto Street is not the exact same mileage as the Santa Monica Fwy - so what was under there must correspond to what exits where CA-60 exits today.

was CA-60 opened only in 1965 as Mike Ballard's site says?  

That, I'm not sure:  according to Cahighways, the Valley Boulevard route/future Pomona Freeway corridor had existed as a LRN in 1933, specifically, LRN 172 - so this was not a post-1964 only project (which, had that been the case, would've meant that State Route 60 was the only ever definitive designation for the freeway west of Pomona).  

This page - http://www.cityofindustry.org/page.php?107 - does suggset that the Pomona Freeway wasn't complete until at least 1967.

[agentsteel53]

Interstate 80 (as signed) from US 101 to the Bay Bridge is officially not in the interstate system (just as Interstate 10 on the San Bernardino Freeway from I-5 to US 101 is "officially" not an interstate either, though in that case it was a one-time I-110 from 1965-1968).

here I thought I-10 multiplexed with I-5 between the San Bernardino and Santa Monica freeway.  It is definitely signed that way in the 1963 photo, but today it is unsigned.

was I-110 (or I-105 for that matter) ever signed?  I think there is still a 110 paddle somewhere.

I've always felt this was a clerical error (that has never been corrected) from the legislative end, as most of the removal of the "Interstate" status on signed I-80 west of the Embarcadero was part of the move to take the Western Freeway segment off of active planning, due to the freeway revolt.  (This then also suggests a followup question: was the Central Freeway, when built, constructed as I-80/US 101 as opposed to just US 101?  The Central was part of the I-80 route until the 1968 changes truncated it to its current western terminus.)

I do not know, but this reminds me of a photo I saw on either the Central Freeway, or the section of 101 just south of it, that had two US shields mounted on top of each other.  Alas, they were the back side of two cutouts, so I have no idea what the route numbers would be.  Was either US-40 or US-50 (but not both) extended down US-101?  Alternately, was there a 40/50 multiplex before US-101 was moved onto that freeway?  One cutout would make sense, and so would three, but ... two?

I'll have to look up the photo.  It's on my computer at home.  I'll post it here and maybe we can recognize the exact section of freeway being pictured.

I'll check around - it may have been in one of the official California Div Highways publications of the day.

that would be excellent; I've looked through a lot of CHPW magazines but not all.  Lots of excellent photos in there!

I'll probably be driving through there tonight so I'll be on the lookout for it...

it may not be visible at night.  I just barely spotted it as I floored it off the Treasure Island on-ramp stop sign.

here - look between the truck and the stop sign for the cross-shaped rusted gantry. 

That is what I'm wondering as well - it could be as simple as CalTrans anticipating the reroute of US 60 to the Pomona routing, before the 1964 renumbering did occur, or it could even  hint at a temporary surface street routing, though I'm not sure that would be the case there.

What that photo doesn't show, however, is what the San Bernardino Freeway mainline signage itself was like.

what specifically are you looking to find out?  I have some other photos.



view on northbound I-5, sometime between 1959-1963 (if we can identify the models of cars, it would help narrow the year down).  Same view as the Ramona Freeway gantry I posted earlier in this thread.

I think I have some other photos that I did not upload to the site.

This photo at Cameron Kaiser's site - http://www.floodgap.com/roadgap/395/xtra/town2.jpg - does show another example of the I-10/US 70/US 99 concurrency, this time signed off of then-US 395 (now I-215) in southern San Bernardino.

I have two from that area as well:





no sign of 60 here, and the earlier photo is 1957 a sign pair - older-style shields on black, but no logo.  60 must be on the Moreno Valley Fwy.  (When did that open?  And how did it connect back to the San Bernardino Fwy before the Pomona Fwy opened and took the number?)

and, as a bonus, here is the Banning split off the San Bernardino which was signed as 60/70/99 at the time:



and one from an unknown location with some awesome 1956-spec shields:

This page - http://www.cityofindustry.org/page.php?107 - does suggset that the Pomona Freeway wasn't complete until at least 1967.

that appears to cover an area that isn't quite the East LA Interchange.

[TheStranger]

Interstate 80 (as signed) from US 101 to the Bay Bridge is officially not in the interstate system (just as Interstate 10 on the San Bernardino Freeway from I-5 to US 101 is "officially" not an interstate either, though in that case it was a one-time I-110 from 1965-1968).

here I thought I-10 multiplexed with I-5 between the San Bernardino and Santa Monica freeway.  It is definitely signed that way in the 1963 photo, but today it is unsigned.

I-10 and "Route 10" are two different things per se (as mentioned on Ballard's site) - I-10 runs concurrently with I-5 on the Golden State Freeway segment that was never US 99, BUT when I-110 was removed from the system in 1968, the orphaned former US 60/70/99 San Bernardino Freeway between the Santa Ana (101) and Golden State (5) was simply added to I-10's legislative definition - and signed as I-10 - but not part of the Interstate.

Confusing, isn't it?

was I-110 (or I-105 for that matter) ever signed?  I think there is still a 110 paddle somewhere.

Honestly, I'm not sure - even 238 has a better claim at being an interstate than the 1965-1968 I-110 did, as 1965-1968 I-110/today's "Route 10" (which is signed for/as I-10) has no exits between its termini.

I've always felt this was a clerical error (that has never been corrected) from the legislative end, as most of the removal of the "Interstate" status on signed I-80 west of the Embarcadero was part of the move to take the Western Freeway segment off of active planning, due to the freeway revolt.  (This then also suggests a followup question: was the Central Freeway, when built, constructed as I-80/US 101 as opposed to just US 101?  The Central was part of the I-80 route until the 1968 changes truncated it to its current western terminus.)

I do not know, but this reminds me of a photo I saw on either the Central Freeway, or the section of 101 just south of it, that had two US shields mounted on top of each other.  Alas, they were the back side of two cutouts, so I have no idea what the route numbers would be.  Was either US-40 or US-50 (but not both) extended down US-101?  Alternately, was there a 40/50 multiplex before US-101 was moved onto that freeway?  One cutout would make sense, and so would three, but ... two?

It could simply be that represents the first eastbound 40/50 trailblazer, on the pole where the first 80 trailblazer is now.  I THINK the shot I saw though was a photo facing northeast down westbound 80, but back of shields (two US, one interstate).

40/50 originally ended at US 101 on city streets (approximately today's Potrero Avenue/10th Street junction), though the east half of the San Francisco Skyway did exist by the late 1930s.  (That makes it possible to even claim that today's I-80 between 5th Street and the Macarthur Maze represents California's first freeway - as US 40/50 - and NOT the Arroyo Seco Parkway - though I don't have more definitive proof.)

Pre-1964, I think that 40/50 ended at 101, while 80 (at least on maps) continued west along 101 to Fell Street (where the Western Freeway would have begun).  My 1967 Rand McNally shows this configuration.

I'll have to look up the photo.  It's on my computer at home.  I'll post it here and maybe we can recognize the exact section of freeway being pictured.

it may not be visible at night.  I just barely spotted it as I floored it off the Treasure Island on-ramp stop sign.

How old are the Treasure Island exits anyway?  Pre-1943?

That is what I'm wondering as well - it could be as simple as CalTrans anticipating the reroute of US 60 to the Pomona routing, before the 1964 renumbering did occur, or it could even  hint at a temporary surface street routing, though I'm not sure that would be the case there.

What that photo doesn't show, however, is what the San Bernardino Freeway mainline signage itself was like.

what specifically are you looking to find out?  I have some other photos.


view on northbound I-5, sometime between 1959-1963 (if we can identify the models of cars, it would help narrow the year down).  Same view as the Ramona Freeway gantry I posted earlier in this thread.

That first car (the white one) looks to be a 57 or 58 Bel-Air...

I have two from that area as well:

 60 must be on the Moreno Valley Fwy.  (When did that open?  And how did it connect back to the San Bernardino Fwy before the Pomona Fwy opened and took the number?)

Judging from the 1936 map previously linked in the thread, the Moreno Valley corridor was part of US 60 at least back then, if not earlier; 60 originally linked back to today's I-10 routing (originally 99 ca. 1933, later 70 as well) going westbound via Mission Boulevard in the west end of Pomona (and then approximately along today's Route 71 for a mile).

and, as a bonus, here is the Banning split off the San Bernardino which was signed as 60/70/99 at the time:
and one from an unknown location with some awesome 1956-spec shields:

That Banning photo...any guesses as to what the background sign says?  "US 395 to 91?"  It's a left-exit, but not sure if it corresponds to today's 60/10 split, or a completely different interchange (i.e. Route 79?).

[hm insulators]

The snowcapped mountain in the Banning photo is Mt. San Jacinto, which is on the south side of the freeway in the picture (the photographer was facing more-or-less due east, in other words). The left exit is probably just a simple access ramp to central Banning.

The other picture with the 1956-era US highway signs looks like it's westbound, heading into Calimesa/Yucaipa. Wonder when that picture was taken--in the background, the traffic gets off the freeway and a bit farther down the road, you can see the new westbound lanes of what is now I-10.

[TheStranger]

The other picture with the 1956-era US highway signs looks like it's westbound, heading into Calimesa/Yucaipa. Wonder when that picture was taken--in the background, the traffic gets off the freeway and a bit farther down the road, you can see the new westbound lanes of what is now I-10.

Would this photo have been taken in Banning, Beaumont, or even Cabazon going west?  (60 never makes it towards Calimesa/Yucaipa, splitting in Beaumont)

[agentsteel53]

Confusing, isn't it?

yep, California's insistence on two systems (legislative vs. signed) is pretty ridiculous.  It should've been corrected in 1934 when the routes were first signed.  Not to mention that I-10, rte 10, and legislative 10 are three different systems - and, in the same area, the legislative definition of I-5 suddenly jumps a level at the East LA interchange, I think to take over old 105.

It could simply be that represents the first eastbound 40/50 trailblazer

I will have to look.

How old are the Treasure Island exits anyway?  Pre-1943?

I thought they dated back to the opening of the bridge in 1936.  There is a very old butterfly gantry at the on-ramp set from Yerba Buena to I-80, but ... unfortunately, the last time I was there, the two signs (one for San Francisco, one for Oakland) that had dated to the 1960s have been covered up with signs in ... Arial!  Ouch!

Judging from the 1936 map previously linked in the thread, the Moreno Valley corridor was part of US 60 at least back then, if not earlier;

is that like the 17 expressway in Santa Cruz, that originally opened in 1940, and has been only minimally upgraded since?  I had heard that the Moreno Valley Freeway opened in 1952, but I can't remember where I got that date.

That Banning photo...any guesses as to what the background sign says?  "US 395 to 91?"  

US 60 70 99/Business.  That sign is from 1956-58, when side-of-the-road signs had all mixed-case, including for cardinal directions and friends*.  

* Junction, Business, Alternate, By-Pass, etc.  Basically anything that would appear on a banner.

Before 1956, side-of-the-road signs were all caps (while overheads were mixed case since 1950, including for cardinal directions) and in 1958 they switched to all-caps for cardinal directions and friends (but they weren't consistent about it - see some 1960s signs on the I-405 to I-605 ramps* where the 605 directions are in mixed case).

* I think that's where they are.  Something to I-605 ramps, anyway!

one more picture of 60-70-99 from the shield gallery.  



how about that!  Individual logos on the shields, which are scaled up versions of 1948-spec standalone markers.  Photo is from 1956, age of the shields is unknown.  I honestly cannot even tell if the sign has reflectors.  Reason I point that out, is because the 1948-style standalone shields were the first retroreflective signs California experimented with before declaring them a failure and returning to plastic buttons in porcelain in 1949.

[agentsteel53]

here's a picture that shows 60 branching off some freeway.  Do you know which one?



that is a 1955-56 sign, photo from '56.  I do believe 1955 is the first year that Cal Div Hwys had shields on the overhead signs, as I did not ever see a photo with shields earlier than that.  Only on side-of-road installations, which were, half the time, spelled out designations anyway.  

1955 is also the first year CA switched to outline shields on side-of-road signs, with just a number in a border.  previously, the signs used to be less abstract, with a bear in the state route, and a US in the US route, and with positive contrast.



1947 spec guide signs with Div Hwys logos.  From the height of the man and the font in DEATH VALLEY (8" letters, it looks like), I should be able to figure out the size of the signs and the shields themselves.  I think they're 18" high shields offhand.  A friend of mine has a 17 sign like the 127 (except with 1949 font); I will ask him.



I don't know how that Cal US 60/70/99 triplet sign fits into the chronology - my guess is it's a 1948 retroreflective experiment, just like the stand-alone shields.

[TheStranger]

yep, California's insistence on two systems (legislative vs. signed) is pretty ridiculous.  It should've been corrected in 1934 when the routes were first signed.  Not to mention that I-10, rte 10, and legislative 10 are three different systems - and, in the same area, the legislative definition of I-5 suddenly jumps a level at the East LA interchange, I think to take over old 105.

California's insistence on legislative handling of route signage in the first place is a big reason for this problem, and if anything, 1964 only partially corrected that problem.

In a perfect world, this would...

1. Entirely be handled on the DOT (CalTrans) level

2. involve route definitions that do not account for specific maintenance vagaries, but rather "Point A to Point B" (case in point: instead of US 101 being in two segments because the Golden Gate Bridge is maintained by another agency, US 101 would simply be defined as "From I-5 in Los Angeles to the Oregon border, via Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, San Jose, San Francisco, Santa Rosa, Eureka, and Crescent City."  Any concurrencies would be noted IN the definition (of the subordinate route, with Interstate/US/state being the hierarchy), rather than omitted.  (i.e. Route 99 would be defined as "from I-5 Exit xx in Wheeler Ridge to Route 36 in Red Bluff, passing through Bakersfield, Fresno,  Modesto, Stockton, Sacramento, Yuba City and Chico, including 2 miles of US 50 and 7 miles of I-5 in Sacramento.")

3. allow for letter designations when applicable (i.e. if I-15E existed today, it wouldn't need a "hidden" designation) like it did as Route 194)

4. completely abolish hidden, unsigned designations - especially my pet peeve, Route 164 (which is a paper designation for a segment of Route 19 that has been signed as Route 19 since 1934!) - and eliminate unsigned route gaps (i.e. Route 16 in Sacramento, Route 39 from fullerton to Asuza) by either introducing/reintroducing signage, or each section receiving a different number.

5. ironically, the basic goal of 1964 - signage should match the legislative definition.  i.e. instead of Route 61 comprising of Route 112, Route 61, and Route 260 (the first and third being unsigned hidden routes), all that would be in the Route 61 definition.

I think right now, I-10 is defined in two segments, originally "Route 1 tO Route 105" and "Route 110 to the Arizona state line" but redefined in 1968 as "Route 1 to Route 5" and "Route 101 to Arizona state line."  In my dream system noted above, I'd redefine it as "from Route 1 in Santa Monica to the Arizona state line, passing through Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Indio and including 2 miles of Route 5 in East Los Angeles and a spur between Route 5 and Route 101."

Judging from the 1936 map previously linked in the thread, the Moreno Valley corridor was part of US 60 at least back then, if not earlier;

is that like the 17 expressway in Santa Cruz, that originally opened in 1940, and has been only minimally upgraded since?  I had heard that the Moreno Valley Freeway opened in 1952, but I can't remember where I got that date.

I think that may indeed be a good comparison point - the easternmost segment of today's Route 60 (just west of Beaumont) has still yet to be upgraded to freeway.  However, the original US 60 route east of Riverside (now a frontage road) and west of Perris Boulevard is Sunnymead Boulevard.  (East of Perris Boulevard, the freeway and modern expressway are on the 1936 routing.)

US 60 70 99/Business.  That sign is from 1956-58, when side-of-the-road signs had all mixed-case, including for cardinal directions and friends*.  

* Junction, Business, Alternate, By-Pass, etc.  Basically anything that would appear on a banner.

Is that photo right at today's 60/10 junction?  I can't tell if it's being taken from I-10 east, or from Route 60 east (there is enough room for a left-hand ramp to 6th Street to have been in the area.)
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Banning,+CA&sll=33.931076,-117.024007&sspn=0.018765,0.034332&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Banning,+Riverside,+California&ll=33.932251,-116.988451&spn=0.009382,0.017166&z=16

here's a picture that shows 60 branching off some freeway.  Do you know which one?

That is most certainly the San Bernardino Freeway (70/99 east of that point) in Pomona it is branching off of; the lack of cardinal direction on this highly suggests that the photo is taken facing east.

It appears that the old ramp to Holt Avenue was supplanted by today's set of ramps from I-10 east to Route 71 south..
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Holt+Ave,+Pomona&sll=33.932251,-116.988451&sspn=0.009382,0.017166&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=W+Holt+Ave,+Pomona,+Los+Angeles,+California&ll=34.063717,-117.792964&spn=0.018736,0.034332&z=15


As for that 60/70/99 retroreflective sign...where was that photo taken?  US 101 south at the junction with I-10 east (the "San Bernardino Split" interchange where 60/70 began)?

---

And here's more photos and info about 60/70 at the west end, from US-ends:
http://www.usends.com/Focus/LosAngeles/index.html

[agentsteel53]

I think right now, I-10 is defined in two segments, originally "Route 1 tO Route 105" and "Route 110 to the Arizona state line" but redefined in 1968 as "Route 1 to Route 5" and "Route 101 to Arizona state line."  In my dream system noted above, I'd redefine it as "from Route 1 in Santa Monica to the Arizona state line, passing through Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Indio and including 2 miles of Route 5 in East Los Angeles and a spur between Route 5 and Route 101."

makes sense.  alas, our tax dollars are busy complicating things.

I think that may indeed be a good comparison point - the easternmost segment of today's Route 60 (just west of Beaumont) has still yet to be upgraded to freeway.  

the age also explains the horrific curves.  That is one challenging road to take at LA speed of traffic (80mph in the ideal case).

Is that photo right at today's 60/10 junction?  I can't tell if it's being taken from I-10 east, or from Route 60 east (there is enough room for a left-hand ramp to 6th Street to have been in the area.)

Given that we are looking at Banning, and not Beaumont, I'd say there's only one freeway in question.  The 10/60 split is a few miles to the west.

As for that 60/70/99 retroreflective sign...where was that photo taken?  US 101 south at the junction with I-10 east (the "San Bernardino Split" interchange where 60/70 began)?

I do not know.  I am not one of those savants that can recognize an intersection based on a single concrete pillar

one more random item to contribute to this discussion, because I just found it on Mike Ballard's page.



End of the Colorado Freeway.  I'd passed by this many times and only now noticed ... this is an 1957-1958 sign!  It is the last of the black signs on a freeway in California.  (Too bad it isn't actually a black sign!)  

mid-1957: logo dropped
late 1957: switch to 3/4 ratio of lowercase to capital letters, instead of older 2/3
mid-1958: switch to modern-looking black signs with different shield shape, rounded-rectangle border, etc*
Sept '59: green signs, with the template the same as the late 1958 set, just the background color changed.

(*these signs may be green, as all the photos I've seen are b/w - the reason I think they are black is because the oldest spec I've seen for green signs is Sept '59, but I've seen field installation photos from 1958 with that sign style)

also, at some point they changed from overlighting to underlighting - from what I can tell, it is when they switched to the "modern-looking" signs, but that's just because I can't think of a counterexample - either an overlit modern sign, or an underlit old one.  An underlit old one would be a conscious change, while an overlit modern one may just be a quick in-situ replacement of an older sign without updating the gantry configuration.

I'd imagine they switched from over- to under- lights because replacing the bulbs would've been a harrowing job in the first case.  

next time I am there, I will be sure to take a look at the date stamp on the End Freeway sign.  

an actual black overhead sign on Foothill Blvd, 1958 stamp on the back, vanished within the last couple years.  Nowadays the only overhead black signs I can think of as being in circulation are the 1948-49 signs near Lake Merritt with non-standardized-font all-caps lettering.

[TheStranger]

Given that we are looking at Banning, and not Beaumont, I'd say there's only one freeway in question.  The 10/60 split is a few miles to the west.

Yeah, now that I'm looking at it, my guess as to which interchange this is, would be present-day I-10 Exit 98 (Sunset Avenue), the first exit in town coming from the Beaumont/LA side.  Not sure though.

That photo of the End Freeway sign reminds me of one of my favorite quirks of downtown LA freeway signage - half-sized green signs for single-legend text, i.e. Mission Road off of the Santa Ana Freeway!  Did that come about in the 1958-or-so time period, and how long did that standard last?  I can't think of any NorCal examples.

[agentsteel53]

the halfies are a very old standard, dating back to the idea that a guide sign should only be as large as needed.  Auto club rectangle signs (1929) with one control city were half the size of those with three control cities.

the oldest half-size overhead gantry I've seen is a photo from 1949.  I'm sure there are older, though, dating back to the first days of overhead gantries (1947 or so) - and, before that, some signs by the side of the road were half size as well.

[TheStranger]

the oldest half-size overhead gantry I've seen is a photo from 1949.  I'm sure there are older, though, dating back to the first days of overhead gantries (1947 or so) - and, before that, some signs by the side of the road were half size as well.

How long were the half-sized signs made in the green-background era?  I don't think there are any black-background examples remaining...

[agentsteel53]

How long were the half-sized signs made in the green-background era?  I don't think there are any black-background examples remaining...

the yellow-background END FREEWAY half-size dates to the black sign era, but indeed there are no genuine black freeway signs left, half-size or otherwise. 

I do not know how long they were made in the half-size.  I don't recall any that aren't porcelain; and offhand the latest I can remember is the 1962 signs that survive on the Arroyo Seco - in older overlit brackets, no less!  But I haven't paid too much attention to half vs. full-size signs so my answer is not particularly authoritative.